CHRW vs OZVN vs LSTR Stock Comparison

C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Oz Vision and Landstar System Prices as of Oct 29, 2026 Peers: Industry group
OZVN Oz Vision Inc.
$2.50 0.0% 1M +138.1% 1Y
Market cap
$73.43M
P/E
–
Revenue (TTM)
$46.93K
Div. yield
–
Logistics Industrials
1 win
LSTR Landstar System Inc
$141.37 -16.1% 1M +13.6% 1Y
Market cap
$4.85B
P/E
30.3x
Revenue (TTM)
$5.29B
Div. yield
–
Logistics Industrials
4 wins

Head to Head

9 decided of 12

C. H. Robinson Worldwide leads on 4 of the 12 questions below (C. H. Robinson Worldwide 4, Landstar System 4, Oz Vision 1). Which ones matter depends on what you are buying for; a cheap multiple and slow growth often come together.

QuestionCHRWOZVNLSTRLeader
Larger companyMarket capitalisation $14.61B $73.43M $4.85B CHRW
Cheaper on earningsLower P/E, profitable companies only 21.8x -1,252x 30.3x CHRW
Cheaper on forward earningsLower price / next fiscal year consensus EPS 20.8x — 23.0x CHRW
Faster revenue growthRevenue growth, trailing twelve months +10.4% -13.5% +10.7% LSTR
More profitableNet margin, trailing twelve months — -125.0% 3.0% LSTR
Better return on capitalReturn on invested capital — — 17.9% –
Less leveragedLower net debt / EBITDA — — -1.1x –
Higher dividend yieldTrailing dividend yield 0.00% — 0.00% –
Better 1-year returnPrice return, last 12 months -1.5% +138.1% +13.6% OZVN
Better 5-year returnAnnualised price return, 5 years +5.6%/yr -13.0%/yr -4.3%/yr CHRW
Less volatileAnnualised volatility, 1 year 48.4% 74.5% 40.1% LSTR
Higher overall scoreMean of the five percentile scores vs peers 36/100 26/100 51/100 LSTR

Percentile Scorecard

CHRWOZVNLSTR

Each axis is the mean percentile of its metrics against the company's industry group. 100 is the best in the group, 50 the middle.

Scores by Axis

AxisCHRWOZVNLSTR
Valuation 27 #100 of 136 2 #134 of 136 26 #101 of 136
Growth 53 #58 of 121 39 #74 of 121 24 #92 of 121
Profitability 41 #66 of 112 11 #100 of 112 56 #50 of 112
Financial Health 22 #110 of 140 52 #68 of 140 86 #21 of 140
Shareholder Returns 35 #52 of 80 – 63 #30 of 80
Overall 36 26 51
  • CHRW ranked among 150 companies in Transportation
  • OZVN ranked among 150 companies in Transportation
  • LSTR ranked among 150 companies in Transportation

Price Performance

Price return, split-adjusted, before dividends. Click a name to hide or show it.

Returns

PeriodCHRWOZVNLSTRSPY
1 month -14.9%0.0%-16.1% +0.7%
3 months -13.3%0.0%-16.5% +3.7%
6 months -29.9%0.0%-23.2% +7.1%
Year to date -20.7%+127.3%-1.6% +12.8%
1 year -1.5%+138.1%+13.6% +11.9%
3 years +58.1%+65.6%-14.2% +85.2%
3 years, per year +16.5%+18.3%-5.0% +22.8%
5 years +31.4%-50.0%-19.6% +67.6%
5 years, per year +5.6%-13.0%-4.3% +10.9%
10 years +88.5%—+100.5% +262.0%
10 years, per year +6.5%—+7.2% +13.7%

Risk

MeasureCHRWOZVNLSTRSPY
Volatility, 1Y 48.4%74.5%40.1% 12.7%
Downside volatility, 1Y 53.1%—46.4% 12.6%
Beta vs S&P 500, 1Y 0.55-0.540.67 1.00
Return / volatility, 1Y -0.031.850.34 0.94
Max drawdown, 5Y -43.2%-90.0%-41.2% -25.4%
From 52-week high -39.2%0.0%-37.3% -1.2%
52-week high $209.42$2.50$225.37 $779.14
52-week low $127.43$1.05$121.51 $631.97

Valuation History

Weekly multiples on trailing twelve-month fundamentals. Negative or extreme readings (a loss year, a collapsed denominator) are left out so the chart stays readable.

MultipleCHRWOZVNLSTR
P/E now vs peer median 22.6xmedian 16.5x -1,252xmedian 16.5x 29.9xmedian 16.5x
P/S now vs peer median 0.8xmedian 0.9x 1,565xmedian 0.9x 0.9xmedian 0.9x
EV/EBITDA now vs peer median —median 8.8x —median 8.8x 17.5xmedian 8.8x
P/FCF now vs peer median 26.2xmedian 11.9x 16,939xmedian 11.9x 30.2xmedian 11.9x
P/B now vs peer median 9.4xmedian 1.2x 5.9xmedian 1.2x 5.7xmedian 1.2x
PEG now vs peer median 1.15median 0.84 19.72median 0.84 -1.74median 0.84

Financial History

Reported figures by fiscal period, placed on the calendar year (or quarter) each period ended in, so companies with different fiscal years line up.

Trailing twelve monthsCHRWOZVNLSTR
Revenue $18.22B $46.93K $5.29B
Gross profit – $13.08K –
Operating income $884.59M -$58.67K $214.56M
Net income $668.81M -$58.67K $160.38M
Free cash flow – $4.34K $157.62M
EPS (diluted) $5.58 $0.00 $4.73
Cash & equivalents $193.13M $4.39K $297.32M
Total debt – $376.49K $68.71M
Shares (diluted) 119.75M 29.37M 33.87M
Enterprise value $14.61B $73.41M $3.29B

All Metrics

58 metrics · best in bold

Bold marks the best reading: the lowest positive value for multiples, leverage and payout, the highest for everything else. The bar under each value is its percentile against that company's own peers. Hover a value for its rank and the peer median.

Valuation

12 metrics
MetricCHRWOZVNLSTR
P/E 22.6x -1,252x 29.9x
P/FCF 26.2x 16,939x 30.2x
P/Operating cash flow 27.9x 16,939x 27.8x
P/S 0.8x 1,565x 0.9x
P/B 9.4x 5.9x 5.7x
P/Tangible book 9.4x -124.5x 5.7x
EV/EBITDA – – 17.5x
EV/EBIT – -1,254x 20.9x
EV/Revenue 0.8x 1,568x 0.8x
EV/FCF – 16,976x 28.4x
EV/Operating cash flow 27.9x 16,976x 26.2x
PEG (3Y EPS CAGR) 1.15 19.72 -1.74

Growth

14 metrics
MetricCHRWOZVNLSTR
Revenue growth (1Y) 10.4% -13.5% 10.7%
Revenue CAGR (3Y) -0.4% -56.6% -2.9%
Gross profit growth (1Y) – 2,944% –
Gross profit CAGR (3Y) – -22.4% –
Operating income growth (1Y) 10.9% 10.7% 19.3%
Operating income CAGR (3Y) 15.7% -101.9% -18.3%
Net income growth (1Y) 11.5% 10.7% 16.8%
Net income CAGR (3Y) 19.7% -101.9% -18.8%
EPS growth (1Y) 12.9% 10.7% 19.3%
EPS CAGR (3Y) 19.7% -63.5% -17.2%
Operating cash flow growth (1Y) -39.1% 127.9% -19.6%
Operating cash flow CAGR (3Y) -28.5% 37.7% -29.5%
Free cash flow growth (1Y) – 127.9% -20.7%
Free cash flow CAGR (3Y) – 37.7% -30.5%

Profitability

14 metrics
MetricCHRWOZVNLSTR
Gross margin – 27.9% –
EBITDA margin – – 4.8%
Operating margin – -125.0% 4.1%
Pretax margin – -125.0% 4.0%
Net margin – -125.0% 3.0%
FCF margin – 9.2% 3.0%
Operating cash flow margin 2.9% 9.2% 3.2%
Return on equity – -0.5% 19.2%
Return on assets – -0.4% 9.0%
Return on invested capital – – 17.9%
Return on capital employed – -0.5% 21.3%
Asset turnover 3.0x 0.0x 3.0x
Cash conversion (OCF / net income) 0.8x -0.1x 1.1x
Stock comp / revenue 0.5% – 0.2%

Financial Health

11 metrics
MetricCHRWOZVNLSTR
Debt / assets – 1.2% 3.8%
Debt / equity – 0.0x 0.1x
Net debt / EBITDA – – -1.1x
Debt / FCF – 37.3x 0.4x
Liabilities / assets 75.3% 8.8% 54.1%
Equity / assets 24.7% 91.2% 45.9%
Interest coverage – – 111.1x
Current ratio 1.3x 0.0x 1.8x
Quick ratio – 0.0x 1.7x
Cash ratio – 0.0x 0.5x
Altman Z-score – 36.19 8.93

Shareholder Returns

7 metrics
MetricCHRWOZVNLSTR
Dividend yield 2.0% – 2.6%
Net buyback yield – – 2.1%
Shareholder yield 2.0% – 4.7%
Payout ratio (earnings) – – –
Payout ratio (FCF) – – –
Dividend growth (1Y) – – –
Dividend CAGR (3Y) – – –

Analyst Estimates

Solid lines are reported fiscal-year results; dashed lines are the consensus for the years ahead. Hover a year for the analysts' high and low, and how each result compared with its estimate.

ConsensusCHRWOZVNLSTR
Forward P/E 20.8xFY2026 – 23.0xFY2026
EPS, next fiscal year $6.12FY2026 – $6.15FY2026
EPS growth, next FY +20.2%FY2026 – +85.8%FY2026
EPS growth, the year after +19.0% – +27.8%
Revenue, next fiscal year $18.98BFY2026 – $5.45BFY2026
Revenue growth, next FY +16.9%FY2026 – +15.1%FY2026
Revenue growth, the year after +1.5% – +17.6%

Institutional Ownership

13F filings, quarter ended Jun 30, 2026
HoldersCHRWOZVNLSTR
Held by institutions 100.0% – 100.0%
Institutions holding 892 – 544
Change in shares held, QoQ -1.7% – -2.8%
Institutions buying 445 – 297
Institutions selling 319 – 153
Buyers to sellers 1.39 – 1.94

Return Correlation

Daily returns, last 12 months

1.00 means two stocks move in lockstep, 0 that they move independently. Pairs below about 0.5 diversify each other.

CHRWOZVNLSTR
CHRW 1.00 0.07 0.66
OZVN 0.07 1.00 0.00
LSTR 0.66 0.00 1.00

Add a Peer

Largest companies in the same industry

Related Comparisons

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is bigger, CHRW, OZVN and LSTR?

C. H. Robinson Worldwide (CHRW) is the largest by market capitalisation: C. H. Robinson Worldwide (CHRW) $14.61B, Oz Vision (OZVN) $73.43M, Landstar System (LSTR) $4.85B.

Which stock is cheaper, CHRW, OZVN and LSTR?

C. H. Robinson Worldwide (CHRW) trades on the lowest price-to-earnings ratio (C. H. Robinson Worldwide (CHRW) 21.8x, Oz Vision (OZVN) -1,252x, Landstar System (LSTR) 30.3x). On next year's consensus earnings, C. H. Robinson Worldwide (CHRW) is cheapest (C. H. Robinson Worldwide (CHRW) 20.8x, Landstar System (LSTR) 23.0x). A lower multiple can reflect slower expected growth, so read it next to the growth figures.

Which company is growing faster?

Landstar System (LSTR) grew revenue fastest over the trailing twelve months: C. H. Robinson Worldwide (CHRW) +10.4%, Oz Vision (OZVN) -13.5%, Landstar System (LSTR) +10.7%.

Which company is more profitable?

Landstar System (LSTR) has the highest net margin (Oz Vision (OZVN) -125.0%, Landstar System (LSTR) 3.0%).

Which stock has performed better?

Over the past year Oz Vision (OZVN) returned the most: C. H. Robinson Worldwide (CHRW) -1.5%, Oz Vision (OZVN) +138.1%, Landstar System (LSTR) +13.6%. Over five years, C. H. Robinson Worldwide (CHRW) compounded fastest (C. H. Robinson Worldwide (CHRW) +5.6%/yr, Oz Vision (OZVN) -13.0%/yr, Landstar System (LSTR) -4.3%/yr). Returns are price only, before dividends.

Which stock is riskier?

By one-year price volatility, Landstar System (LSTR) has been the steadiest (C. H. Robinson Worldwide (CHRW) 48.4%, Oz Vision (OZVN) 74.5%, Landstar System (LSTR) 40.1%). Volatility measures how widely the price swings, not the risk of the business.

Which is the better stock, CHRW, OZVN and LSTR?

There is no single answer; it depends on what you are buying for. On the 12 head-to-head measures on this page, C. H. Robinson Worldwide (CHRW) leads on 4. Business Quant does not give investment advice; use the comparison as a starting point for your own research.

Data from SEC filings, exchange prices and consensus estimates, via Business Quant. Percentile scores compare each company with its own peer group, so two companies' scores are each relative to different peers unless you rank against the whole market. Price returns exclude dividends. Nothing on this page is investment advice.